Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1887-08-09

1892 500. IL Includes besides the cost OF procuring
and laying new mains, all the expenses attendant
plugs hydrants foundations, the care and repair
OF the $50 miles OF water mains, their
WaI mns and and pss SSss ans @
rendered necessary by changes in grade Of streets
inspection, the finding and suppression of leaks
and waste, the gathering OF data for fixing the
mains for the supply Of water to premises, the
putting In OF service pipes to the curb in streets
be paved, &C. Seven years out OF the nine IT also
includes all expenses at the Georgetown and
Washington high-service pumping stations, for
fuel engineers, fremen, &C. These aggregate
mains, vary from $25 900 to $4,000 per year, as
Will appear from the following data:
A considerable proportion OF these expenses
arose from the poor character OF the materials
furnished and work done under the old board OF
public works. During the period from December
1879, to November l, 1875 according TO the pub
lished charges" there were expended SOL, l.53
Tor laying water mains" Now the fact is that
this sum included the entire expenditures OF the
water department for the period with the eXcep-
ton of the regular salaryroll OF 81 40. contin
gent expenses s97436 and the new high-service
riod there were laid $40 feet OF 4-inch pipe 5Os2
feet OF 6-inch pipe, and 1921 feet Of Sinch pipe.
almost IL miles OF new pipe. Out OF this sum was
PAID the pumping expenses OF the Georgetown
station and all the expense OF maintenance OF the
water service. Out OF this sum were also paid the
expenses OF an elaborate water survey OF the
city. The tabulated reports of this survey
cover thirty-eght pages OF Registrar Lubey's
printed report and give In each square OF the city
the number OF houses and water fixtures OF every
kind. all different varieties OF water closets, bath
tubs, urtnas, sinks. engines, fountains spigots,
In order and those out of repair. There are no
data available to determine the cost VI this sur
vey,, but it must have amounted to many thou-
sands of dollars, although the Information was
never used as basis for water charges.
The records OF the water Office were not kept at
this time In such a manner as to permit a
n ami.
classes OF work. Judging from later years, in
which the records have been more perfectly kept,
1t IS fair to assume that the expenses OF the
department for the period in question, 1875
for all items not connected with the laying OF new
mains. and paid for out OF the sl0l, 17l.53, was
about $4,000, leaving S54, 11l.53 AS the cost Of
laying 57,345 feet OF mains or The sizes herein
before stated.
1t was not until the present form OF the District
government became falrlyestab.ished, in lS1S-'.9
that the records OF the water Office We're kept in such
amanner as TO permit satisfactory determination
OF the costs OF the different classes Of Work TO be
arrived at now.
A comparison of the actual amount Of pipe laid
with the cost thereof for the years ending June
30 1852, 49, and 'S4, with the amounts alleged to
have been expended for that purpose, Will show
how wantonly the facts have been misstated.
gu5ag o nb e Me5s nd
45.S57.S4 as alleged During the year 1882 SO
there were laid t. I10 feet OF 6-inch pipe at cost
sides this there laid 675 feet OF 12inch pipe
and connection for the protection OF the Govern
ment Printing once and for which special ap;
pipe and S' 1oss @ rees @ of 'ssi i.aen onse pipe,
Instead Of sss,s5l.5s, as alleged. Aggrsgatins
these instead OF there having been $492 9SO17 ex-
pended for the laying OF water-mains during the
period from December l, 1875, to June 30, 1884,
there has been In reality not more than SlS5 900 10
$3.50, 900 so expended. This accords reasonably
wen With the ar amount nl received from
tirely disposes OF all criticism founded on the al
legged discrepancies in the cost OF laying Of mains
| and the receipts from Waterman taxes.
| 1t Is proper to state that, in the reply OF the
| Commissioners to Senator Morgan's resolutions,
| the expenditures were given under the ''head OF
| appropriations" and do not pretend to give the
| expenses incurred for different classes OF work,
such as laying new mains, repairing old ones, fire.
Congress for years to define some OF the items in
the water department appropriation bill, and then
TO make an omnibus item covering all other neces-
For instance, for the past year, S6-'S7, there
was appropriated for salaries SO. $50, for contin-
gent expenses, s, 1907 for interest and sinking
and sinking rund on account OF new supply,
| s57, ,239O2; and for pumping expenses and pipe
| distribution, 1000. This latter item was in-
tended by Congress to cover all expenses not
| otherwise provided for, was so understood by the
water once, and has been so construed by the of1-
The published allegation is that "there has been
stolen, or misapproprtated, more than 1000 OF
the waterman att tax fund" and the proof offered is
l
| ported by Register Cox as standing on the books
| OF the department as outstanding Waterman
taxes and interest then June 80, lSSO) due GER
| tain sums are added for cost OF water
mains for the six years ending June 30, 1881,
'S2, 'S3, 81 'S5, 49, making total OF $426 OH
| from these Is subtracted the receipts for
| Waterman taxes during these years aggregating
| $124, ,6S4.3O and the statement made that there
should stand on the books due to the water de-
partment, exclusive OF profits and accrued inter-
est, the sum OF $301 1913 05 whereas In the report
| OF the Commissioners the following sum, principal
and interest," is stated to be on the books as out
| standing Waterman taxes.
Arrears. $4i 379 80
| luIt[cSt Ou Sduc
|
making the ''stear' 3O1 333O5, less $780, 1854 or
| $40 5S9.5l. Now what are the facts? Starting
from the same datum, the amount stated by Reg
| lStrar COX as outstanding Waterman taxes due
June 80, $780, $92, ,95S. A, and adding to this the
amount actually expended Tor laying water mains
during the years in question, we have
| TRUE STATEMENT.